Cabinet Office

Cabinet Office: Mobile Phones

David T. C. Davies: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will provide a list of the brands of mobile phone which Cabinet ministers are advised not to use.

Mr David Lidington: It is for individual Government departments to manage their own technology and telecommunications requirements in accordance with their business and security needs, including equipping their Ministers with appropriate ICT equipment. HMG takes the secure use of mobile phones very seriously and advice on how to securely manage mobile devices is published by the National Cyber Security Centre. Such information includes recommending the use of Android devices on the Android Enterprise Recommended (AER) list and for iOS, using supported devices with a Secure Enclave.

Department for Work and Pensions

Universal Credit

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what response her Department makes when notified by a local authority of an error in a resident’s universal credit calculation.

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what support her Department provides to local authorities to help (a) identify and (b) remedy errors in universal credit calculations.

Alok Sharma: Holding answer received on 20 May 2019



It is not clear whether the questions relate to the Local Authority as the provider of housing or as the administrator of Housing Benefit and Council Tax. This answer therefore responds on both counts. Local Authority as landlord: The Local Authority use the ‘Landlord Portal’ to provide details of a claimant’s rent and tenancy details. When the information provided does not match what the claimant has given, the claimant will then be able to accept or reject the information uploaded by the Local Authority by logging into their Universal Credit account. If the claimant accepts the information provided by the Local Authority no further action is required. If the Local Authority has provided information that is rejected by the claimant, the claimant is advised to make contact to resolve this. This could require a subsequent housing declaration to be provided. The ‘Landlord Portal’ has a summary screen that allows the Local Authority to confirm or change the information they are about to provide before it has been submitted. This process applies whenever there is a rent change, including annual uprating of rent. The Landlord Portal is the streamlined communication tool which allows the Local Authority to disclose the rent thus highlighting errors in the claimants Universal Credit. Local Authority as administrator of Housing Benefit and Council Tax: Once a claim to Universal Credit has been made, the Local Authority will receive a notification if the claimant is in receipt of Housing Benefit. This will inform the Local Authority of the claim to Universal Credit so they can take the action to close the Housing Benefit claim where needed. The Local Authority will inform Universal Credit of the action they have taken and if there is any payment to be offset within the first assessment period. Additionally, during the Universal Credit claim process, the claimant will be asked if their name is on the council tax bill. If the claimant answers ‘yes’, they are asked if they have applied for a reduction in their council tax. If the claimant answers that they have applied or will apply for a Council Tax Reduction, their details will be shared with the Local Authority. This is a one-way communication which allows for the Local Authority to take the appropriate action regarding an application for a Council Tax Reduction.

Universal Credit

Steve McCabe: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 5 May 2019 to Question 249847, what assessment of a universal credit claimant’s financial situation is made when calculating what percentage of their payment will be deducted in order to repay an advance.

Alok Sharma: Holding answer received on 20 May 2019



The maximum amount a claimant can receive as a new claim advance payment is 100 per cent of their total indicative Universal Credit award. The claimant can decide the length of repayment period when they request the advance. This can be up to a maximum 12 months. The rate of repayment is decided by dividing the total advance amount by the agreed repayment period.Affordability is managed by ensuring the recovery rate is not more than the equivalent of 40 per cent of the standard allowance and help is available for those struggling to meet the recovery rate once recovery begins. In many cases, because claimants choose to repay advances over many months, advance repayments constitute less than 40% of a standard allowance. In exceptional circumstances, recovery can be deferred for up to 3 months from the start of the recovery period.Advances are not loans; they are an interest free advance payment of benefit, available to help people who need immediate financial support, which is then recovered over an agreed period. The Department has taken a number of steps to ensure that advances meet the needs of claimants and that recovery arrangements are personalised and reasonable. From October 2019 we are reducing the maximum rate of deductions to 30 per cent and from October 2021 we are increasing the maximum recovery period for advances from 12 to 16 months.

Social Security Benefits: Disqualification

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many three year sanctions were issued by her Department to social security benefit recipients in each of the last 10 years.

Alok Sharma: Information on the number of three years’ sanctions is recorded on our systems and we centrally collate some Management Information. However, the total number cannot be calculated as it is collected across different benefits on different systems and is not centrally collated in a way that allows analysis to be undertaken easily. An extensive interrogation of our systems would be required in order to provide the information requested, which would incur disproportionate cost. Nevertheless, from the Department’s quarterly sanctions publication, in table 1.7 of the supporting data tables, 2,904 individuals have received three (or more) high level JSA sanction failures, from October 2012 to January 2019. It is not possible to readily unpick how many of these were 3 year sanctions (if two high level sanctions received by an individual were more than a year apart then that would mean they would not have been escalated up to a 3 year sanction duration after their 3rd high level failure). The published data on individuals that received a third high level JSA sanction cannot be split by year. This is because the data is not structured in a way to readily analyse this.